61

výsledky

Slovo (slova)
Druh publikace
Oblast
Autor
Klíčové slovo
Datum

CAN NATURE GET IT RIGHT? A Study on Rights of Nature in the European Context

01-03-2021

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI Committee, explores the concept of “Rights of Nature” (RoN) and its different aspects in legal philosophy and international agreements, as well as in legislation and case-law on different levels. The study delves on the ideas of rights of nature in comparison with rights to nature, legal personhood and standing in court for natural entities, and analyses ...

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI Committee, explores the concept of “Rights of Nature” (RoN) and its different aspects in legal philosophy and international agreements, as well as in legislation and case-law on different levels. The study delves on the ideas of rights of nature in comparison with rights to nature, legal personhood and standing in court for natural entities, and analyses ECtHR and CJEU case-law on access to justice in environmental decision-making. It emphasises, in particular, the need to strengthen the requirements for independent scientific evaluations in certain permit regimes under EU law. The study also highlights the crucial importance of promoting the role of civil society as watchdog over the implementation of EU environmental law by way of a wider access to justice via both the national courts and the CJEU, which is also in line with the political priorities for delivering the European Green Deal.

Open Plan Offices - The new ways of working. The advantages and disadvantages of open office space

30-09-2020

KEY FINDINGS Open office spaces are introduced for the following reason: - Saving costs on real estate. Real estate expenses are the second largest costs for a company. By creating more workplaces in the same amount of square meters costs can be reduced on buildings and maintenance. - Increase communication. If people are in closer proximity from one another and move around freely communication will increase. - Improve team work. As teams are now sharing the same space knowledge sharing will ...

KEY FINDINGS Open office spaces are introduced for the following reason: - Saving costs on real estate. Real estate expenses are the second largest costs for a company. By creating more workplaces in the same amount of square meters costs can be reduced on buildings and maintenance. - Increase communication. If people are in closer proximity from one another and move around freely communication will increase. - Improve team work. As teams are now sharing the same space knowledge sharing will increase both within the same team and across different teams. The following arguments oppose the introduction of open office spaces: - Loss of productivity. Employees are distracted faster because of noise or colleagues moving around. It takes on average 25 minutes to resume a task after distraction. In an open office space employees are distracted faster because of phone calls, people walking by or nearby conversations. - Problems with noise, temperature and fatigue. As said before, noise is one of the main distractions in an open office space. Temperature is managed centrally and it could therefore be too cold of one person and too warm for another. Fatigue is a side effect from noise and temperature and the fact that people have a constant overload of information with the introduction of multiple screens like phone, tablets and computer. - Increase of sickness. As employees are in closer proximity of one another diseases can spread faster. The spread of diseases raise the amount of sick days taken in a company. - Decrease of overall well-being of employees. The main cause for the diminishing of well-being is the level of stress. The idea of being watched all the time increases the levels of stress in an open office space.

Externí autor

Alexandra Pouwels

Emergency measures on migration: Article 78(3) TFEU

06-03-2020

Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for the adoption of provisional measures in emergency migratory situations at the EU's external borders. It was first used during the 2015 migration crisis. On the basis of that article, the Council of the EU adopted binding decisions providing for the relocation from Italy and Greece of 160 000 people so as to ensure a fair and balanced distribution of, and sharing of responsibility for, asylum-seekers who were ...

Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for the adoption of provisional measures in emergency migratory situations at the EU's external borders. It was first used during the 2015 migration crisis. On the basis of that article, the Council of the EU adopted binding decisions providing for the relocation from Italy and Greece of 160 000 people so as to ensure a fair and balanced distribution of, and sharing of responsibility for, asylum-seekers who were already present in the EU. However, despite most Member States' willingness to relocate asylum-seekers, some challenged the Council's decision before the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) or refused to help implement the decision. On 1 March 2020, in the light of events on its Turkish border, Greece announced that it wanted Article 78(3) TFEU to be used to ensure full EU support in the situation of a sudden influx of third-country nationals into the EU.

Action for annulment of an EU act

08-11-2019

An action for annulment is a legal procedure before the Court of Justice that guarantees the conformity of EU legislative acts, regulatory acts and individual acts with the superior rules of the EU legal order. An action can be brought within two months of the publication or notification of the contested measure. Applicants are divided into three categories: privileged, semi-privileged and non-privileged. Privileged applicants – the Member States, Parliament, Commission and Council – may bring an ...

An action for annulment is a legal procedure before the Court of Justice that guarantees the conformity of EU legislative acts, regulatory acts and individual acts with the superior rules of the EU legal order. An action can be brought within two months of the publication or notification of the contested measure. Applicants are divided into three categories: privileged, semi-privileged and non-privileged. Privileged applicants – the Member States, Parliament, Commission and Council – may bring an action for annulment purely in the interests of legality, without proving any particular interest. Semi-privileged applicants – comprising the European Committee of the Regions, the European Central Bank and the European Court of Auditors – may bring an action for annulment only to protect their own prerogatives. Finally, non-privileged applicants, comprising all natural and legal persons, including regional or local governments, may bring an action for annulment only if they prove that the contested act infringes upon their interests. More specifically, they may bring an action against an act addressed to them, or – if it is not addressed to them – if it is of direct and individual concern to them, as well as against a regulatory act that is of direct concern to them and does not entail implementing measures. The Treaty provides five grounds for annulment, i.e. reasons for which the Court may declare an EU act to be null and void. These are lack of competence; infringement of an essential procedural requirement; infringement of the Treaties; infringement of a rule relating to the application of the Treaties; and, finally, misuse of powers. If the Court finds the action well founded, it declares the nullity of the contested act, which, in principle, is considered null from the moment of its adoption. However, the Court may decide that some effects of the contested act should, nonetheless, remain in force in the interests of protecting legitimate interests and legal security.

EU policies – Delivering for citizens: Human Rights

28-06-2019

In the 70 years since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – the first international document to set common standards of achievement for all states – the pivotal role and moral, legal and political significance of human rights in the international arena have become indisputable. However, despite considerable progress in many areas on recognition, codification and implementation, human rights have also come under increased attack. Whether in theatres of war or in the political ...

In the 70 years since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – the first international document to set common standards of achievement for all states – the pivotal role and moral, legal and political significance of human rights in the international arena have become indisputable. However, despite considerable progress in many areas on recognition, codification and implementation, human rights have also come under increased attack. Whether in theatres of war or in the political arena, human rights are now often rejected on ideological grounds. The EU itself has not been spared by the current backlash. In its Member States, a populist wave has empowered some political forces that increasingly question the significance of core human rights, such as the right to freedom of expression. In these troubled times for human rights, opinion polls show that European citizens perceive human rights as one of the most important values for them personally and one of the values that best represent the EU itself. Having emerged from World War II and its atrocities, European countries were determined to secure lasting peace, and the Union they created is founded on respect for democracy, the rule of law and human rights, which guide and shape its legislation and policies. Within the EU, recent action has included new legislation on data protection and access to justice, the European Pillar of Social Rights, and initiatives to combat inequality, discrimination and hate speech. There is also an acknowledgement that more needs to be done to complete the legal framework to combat discrimination and strengthen internal mechanisms for upholding the rule of law. Human rights are additionally a general objective of EU external action. The EU is deeply committed to promoting human rights, as enshrined in international treaties, in its relations with third countries and with other multilateral regional and global institutions. During Parliament's last mandate, the EU consistently applied and deepened a range of policy approaches that strengthen its role and image as a normative power that inspires others through its example. Maintaining and consolidating this policy remains vital for preserving the EU's image and credibility as a normative power based on values, and one that has the capacity to act at a time when the principle of multilateralism is increasingly questioned. This is an update of an earlier briefing issued in advance of the 2019 European elections.

Challenges in the implementation of EU Law at national level

15-11-2018

This briefing analyses specific implications of the better regulation package for the European Commission’s enforcement policy. It also assesses the current state of play of implementation of EU law using the latest available data. Additionally, it analyses the main barriers to effective implementation and how the EU institutions can assist national parliaments with these problems. Finally, it makes some key policy recommendations for further empowering national and EU institutions in ensuring timely ...

This briefing analyses specific implications of the better regulation package for the European Commission’s enforcement policy. It also assesses the current state of play of implementation of EU law using the latest available data. Additionally, it analyses the main barriers to effective implementation and how the EU institutions can assist national parliaments with these problems. Finally, it makes some key policy recommendations for further empowering national and EU institutions in ensuring timely and correct application of EU law.

Externí autor

Melanie Smith

International Agreements in Progress: EU-Singapore trade and investment agreements closer to conclusion

09-10-2018

On 18 April 2018, the European Commission proposed to the Council of the EU to sign and conclude two agreements with Singapore. These agreements were created by dividing the free trade agreement reached between the EU and Singapore (EUSFTA) in 2014, but not ratified, into separate trade and investment protection agreements. When presenting the agreements, the Commission underlined that they demonstrate the commitment of Singapore and the EU to fair trade and open markets. The Council of the EU is ...

On 18 April 2018, the European Commission proposed to the Council of the EU to sign and conclude two agreements with Singapore. These agreements were created by dividing the free trade agreement reached between the EU and Singapore (EUSFTA) in 2014, but not ratified, into separate trade and investment protection agreements. When presenting the agreements, the Commission underlined that they demonstrate the commitment of Singapore and the EU to fair trade and open markets. The Council of the EU is expected to authorise the signature of the agreements in October 2018. The Commission aims to have the trade agreement come into effect before the end of its mandate in 2019, after its approval by the Council and the European Parliament. Singapore will be the first member state of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to sign bilateral trade and investment agreements with the EU. The EU views bilateral agreements with ASEAN members as steps towards achieving the final objective of a region-to-region trade and investment agreement with ASEAN. Therefore, the EU Singapore agreements are considered a reference as regards the EU's ambition to conclude trade and investment agreements with other ASEAN members. Second edition. The ‘International Agreements in Progress’ briefings are updated at key stages throughout the process, from initial discussions through to ratification. To view earlier editions of this briefing, please see: PE 607.255, June 2017.

The State of the Union [What Think Tanks are thinking]

07-09-2018

The President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, will deliver his last State of the Union address to the European Parliament on Wednesday 12 September, a little more than eight months before the next European elections. In this annual speech in Strasbourg, President Juncker is expected to take stock of the state of play on his ten priorities for the 2014-2019 political cycle and present his remaining initiatives on building a 'more united, stronger and more democratic Union'. Juncker ...

The President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, will deliver his last State of the Union address to the European Parliament on Wednesday 12 September, a little more than eight months before the next European elections. In this annual speech in Strasbourg, President Juncker is expected to take stock of the state of play on his ten priorities for the 2014-2019 political cycle and present his remaining initiatives on building a 'more united, stronger and more democratic Union'. Juncker’s 2017 address was marked by cautious optimism: since then, whilst the European economy has continued to recover, several other challenges have proved persistent. This note offers a selection of links to commentaries, studies and reports from major international think tanks on the state of the EU and possible reforms. Brexit-related publications can be found in a previous edition of 'What Think Tanks are thinking’ from July 2018. Papers on migration are available in an earlier edition in this series, published in June. Those on euro-zone reform appear in a previous publication in June.

The Brexit process [What Think Tanks are thinking]

12-01-2018

The EU’s Heads of State or Government gave the green light in December 2017 to the second phase of negotiations on the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the EU. They agreed that ‘sufficient progress’ had been made in talks on issues in the first phase. Those include the UK's financial obligations on leaving the EU, the rights of EU citizens within the UK and of UK citizens within the EU, and how to deal with the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. The next phase of talks will focus on transitional ...

The EU’s Heads of State or Government gave the green light in December 2017 to the second phase of negotiations on the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the EU. They agreed that ‘sufficient progress’ had been made in talks on issues in the first phase. Those include the UK's financial obligations on leaving the EU, the rights of EU citizens within the UK and of UK citizens within the EU, and how to deal with the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. The next phase of talks will focus on transitional arrangements and the future EU-UK relationship, including in the field of trade. This note offers links to recent commentaries and reports published by major international think tanks and other organisations on EU-UK negotiations and on the implications of Brexit more widely. More studies on these issues can be found in a previous edition of ‘What Think Tanks are thinking’ from October 2017.

Jurisdiction upon and after the UK’s withdrawal: The perspective from the UK Constitutional Order

10-01-2018

This briefing, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the AFCO Committee, looks into the issue of the governance of the UK Withdrawal Agreement from the perspective of the UK legal and constitutional order. It examines, in particular, how the UK, as a dualist state, where international agreements have domestic legal effect only to the extent provided for in domestic legislation, will and can ensure respect of this ...

This briefing, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the AFCO Committee, looks into the issue of the governance of the UK Withdrawal Agreement from the perspective of the UK legal and constitutional order. It examines, in particular, how the UK, as a dualist state, where international agreements have domestic legal effect only to the extent provided for in domestic legislation, will and can ensure respect of this agreement. It also looks on the role of domestic courts as well as the continued impact of CJEU -UK courts’ rulings. It finally looks into the relevant provisions on jurisdiction in the draft EU Withdrawal Bill currently debated in the UK Parliament.

Externí autor

Steve PEERS

Chystané akce

25-10-2021
European Gender Equality Week - October 25-28, 2021
Další akce -
FEMM AFET DROI SEDE DEVE BUDG CONT ECON EMPL ITRE TRAN AGRI PECH CULT JURI PETI
25-10-2021
Ninth meeting of the Joint Parliamentary Scrutiny Group on Europol, 25-26 October
Další akce -
LIBE
26-10-2021
Investment Policy and Investment Protection Reform
Slyšení -
INTA

Partneři